Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 4.djvu/866

852 , % FEDERAL JBEPORTEB. , . �the jurisdiction ,of this court :set ont the fact, in substance, that one G. B. Maury had oti the tbird instant, set on foot a suit in the said chancery court of Eichmond, and exhibited his bill there against the defendajnt company and Blakey, the trustee, for purposes similar to those sought by the proceed- ing in this court. It has been shown that in neither of the two suits in the chancery court of Eichmond has the cause proceeded to issue; that those suits are still at rules; that that court has not appointed a receiver or taken custody of the res,^that is to say, the effects of the defendant company, — or made any order by whioh it took cognizance or assumed jurisdiction of the controversy between the parties to the re- spective suits; and that the parties there are not the same as the parties to the suit here. It bas been ehpwn that the nature and objecta of the suits in the chancery court of Eich- mond are different fronj those of the suit here. The Maury bill is filed in his own name 9,]one, although he asks for ail proper accounts, for a receiver, and that ail creditors may be ascertained, the f und colieeted and distributed, and the deed set aside. It asks for a personal decree for the amount Maury has paid the company, on the ground that it hasfor- feited its contract by refusing to give him a paid-up pçilicy in «xchange for his originalpqlicy. It makes the company and the trustee alone parties' defendant, although leave is asked to make ail the directors.çind stockholders parties hereafter when their names shaU be ascertained. �The Blakey bill, a copy of which is filed in this court, though the original is not yet filed in the chancery court of Eichmond, asks the assistance of the court to carryinto efifect the provisions of the trust deed. On the other hand, the suit in this court asks, in the name of the complainants and of ail creditors who may corne in, for the special and general relief usually asked in creditors' bills, that the trust deed shall be set aside, that the funds be colieeted and distributed, and that a receiver be appointed; and it makes the company, the trus- tee, and the stockholders ail parties defendant. I overruled the objections raised by the two pleas on the foUowing grounds, viz. : that non-resident citizens had a constitutional ����